28/06/20 - Staff Meeting Notes

[flugs]

but who shoves a gun in the face of their dealer?

 

[Bnjemann]

Me. Why would I buy drugs when I can get them for free?

 

[Creepis]

NPC is breaking 3.4 smh

 

[Double J]

It's probably evidence that is 3+ weeks old.

 

[Zepol]

​

Withholding evidence

• Evidence that has been held for a long time period will not be admissible and evidence that is "dug up" or held maliciously can lead to punishment on the reporter.

How long is this long period of time ?

 

[Double J]

Make sure to read, Duffy asked the same question, I'd assume it'd be around 2+ weeks maybe a month.

 

[Zepol]

My bad i should read more

 

[joey]

21 days mein führer @Duffy

 

[CensoredExe]

Withholding evidence

Even if someone comes with proof that someone was cheating?

 

[Double J]

It'd probably be an exception.

 

[Dom_]

Evidence that deals with more severe issues will be made an exception, however obviously a relevant time limit would still need to be met. We wouldn't go banning people who cheated 3 years ago or something stupid like that, same with metagame.

 

[LEWIS 088]

Dom I have received evidence of you running across the highway 3 years ago, you will be banned now.

 

[Double J]

@LEWIS 088 Another Perma ban?

 

[Dom_]

@LEWIS 088 shaking in my boots

 

[Deleted member 5920]

You can have a hand in your pocket?

 

[Creepis]

@LEWIS 088

 

[Murtsley]

• Evidence that has been held for a long time period will not be admissible and evidence that is "dug up" or held maliciously can lead to punishment on the reporter.

You looking to get someone banned? You're gonna need this, sucker!

 

[platinum_miner]

Perfect time to begin reading this then

 

[Husky]

Did not mean to bump this thread however something needs clarifying, specifically regarding the clarification to 3.4. in this post:

3.4 Enforcement

• Clarified that when being gun pointed and told not to move from behind you may not pull your gun even if it is in passive stance.

Why is it now even if your gun is in attack stance that this is now being enforced as a violation of 3.4.? If that change was made why wasn't this actually communicated to the community properly, @Tetra (I believe) was the one who lost 70k to this bizarre ruling and without any prior notice.

How do sweaters now safely sell drugs? before you could throw them a PPK they could keep it in passive and they would be on their way, was this considered before making the change?

Was this change even communicated to you as Community Manager or discussed within this exact meeting? @Dom_

 

[Madda]

As far as I know we have never discussed holding it in actual attack stance, and if this is against 3.4 or not. So if it is being enforced like this there is probably some different views going around. Will clear up.